Search

Abstract Background While point of care testing (PoCT) for general practitioners is becoming increasingly popular, few studies have investigated whether it represents value for money. This study aims to assess the relative cost-effectiveness of PoCT in general practice (GP) compared to usual testing practice through a pathology laboratory. Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis based on a randomized controlled trial with 4,968 patients followed up for 18 months and fifty-three general practices in urban, rural and remote locations across three states in Australia. The incremental costs and health outcomes associated with a clinical strategy of PoCT for INR, HbA1c, lipids, and ACR were compared to those from pathology laboratory testing. Costs were expressed in year 2006 Australian dollars. Non-parametric bootstrapping was used to generate 95% confidence intervals. Results The point estimate of the total direct costs per patient to the health care sector for PoCT was less for ACR than for pathology laboratory testing, but greater for INR, HbA1c and Lipids, although none of these differences was statistically significant. PoCT led to significant cost savings to patients and their families. When uncertainty around the point estimates was taken into account, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for PoCT was found to be unfavourable for INR, but somewhat favourable for ACR, while substantial uncertainty still surrounds PoCT for HbA1c and Lipids. Conclusions The decision whether to fund PoCT will depend on the price society is willing to pay for achievement of the non-standard intermediate outcome indicator. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12605000272695

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to assess the impact that Academic Detailing (AD) had on General Practitioners' use of diagnostic imaging for shoulder complaints in general practice and their knowledge and confidence to manage shoulder pain. Methods One-to-one Academic Detailing (AD) for management of shoulder pain was delivered to 87 General Practitioners (GPs) in metropolitan Adelaide, South Australia, together with locally developed clinical guidelines and a video/DVD on how to examine the shoulder. Three months after the initial AD a further small group or an individual follow up session was offered. A 10-item questionnaire to assess knowledge about the shoulders was administered before, immediately after, and 3 months after AD, together with questions to assess confidence to manage shoulder complaints. The number of requests for plain film (X-ray) and ultrasound (US) imaging of the shoulder was obtained for the intervention group as well as a random comparison group of 90 GP's from the same two Divisions. The change in the rate of requests was assessed using a log Poisson GEE with adjustment for clustering at the practice level. A linear mixed effects model was used to analyse changes in knowledge. Results In an average week 54% of GPs reported seeing fewer than 6 patients with shoulder problems. Mean (SD) GP knowledge score before, immediately after and 3-months after AD, was 6.2/10 (1.5); 8.6/10 (0.96) and; 7.2/10 (1.5) respectively (p < 0.0001). Three months after AD, GPs reported feeling able to take a more meaningful history, more confident managing shoulder pain, and felt their management of shoulder pain had improved. Requests for ultrasound imaging were approximately 43.8% higher in the period 2 years before detailing compared to six months after detailing (p < 0.0001), but an upward trend toward baseline was observed in the period 6 months to 1 year after AD. There was no statistically significant change in the rate of requests from before to after AD for plain-radiographs (p = 0.11). No significant changes in the rate of requests over time were observed in the control groups. Conclusion These results provide evidence that AD together with education materials and guidelines can improve GPs' knowledge and confidence to manage shoulder problems and reduce the use of imaging, at least in the short term.

Background: Outcomes for colorectal cancer patients vary significantly. Compared to other countries, Australia has a good record with patient outcomes, yet there is little information available on the referral pathway. This paper explores the views of Australian patients and their experiences of referral for colorectal cancer treatment following diagnosis; the aim was to improve our understanding of the referral pathway and guide the development of future interventions. Methods: A purposive sampling strategy was used, recruiting 29 patients representing urban and rural areas from 3 Australian states who participated in 4 focus groups. Seven patients provided individual interviews to supplement the data. Recordings were transcribed verbatim, data was coded with NVivo software and analysed thematically before deductive analysis. Results: Four aspects of the referral process were identified by patients, namely detection/diagnosis, referral for initial treatment/specialist care, the roles of the GP/specialist, and the patient's perceived involvement in the process. The referral process was characterised by a lack of patient involvement, with few examples of shared decision-making and few examples of limited choice. However, patients did not always feel they had the knowledge to make informed decisions. Information exchange was highly valued by patients when it occurred, and it increased their satisfaction with the process. Other factors mediating care included the use of the public versus private health system, the quality of information exchange (GP to specialist and GP to patient), continuity of care between GP and specialist, and the extent of information provision when patients moved between specialist and GP care. Conclusions: Patients described poor GP continuity, ad hoc organisational systems and limited information exchange, at both interpersonal and inter-organisational levels, all leading to sub-optimal care. Implementation of a system of information feedback to GPs and engagement with them might improve information exchange for patients, enabling them to be more involved in improved referral outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While point of care testing (PoCT) for general practitioners is becoming increasingly popular, few studies have investigated whether it represents value for money. This study aims to assess the relative cost-effectiveness of PoCT in general practice (GP) compared to usual testing practice through a pathology laboratory. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis based on a randomized controlled trial with 4,968 patients followed up for 18 months and fifty-three general practices in urban, rural and remote locations across three states in Australia. The incremental costs and health outcomes associated with a clinical strategy of PoCT for INR, HbA1c, lipids, and ACR were compared to those from pathology laboratory testing. Costs were expressed in year 2006 Australian dollars. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to generate 95% confidence intervals. Results: The point estimate of the total direct costs per patient to the health care sector for PoCT was less for ACR than for pathology laboratory testing, but greater for INR, HbA1c and Lipids, although none of these differences was statistically significant. PoCT led to significant cost savings to patients and their families. When uncertainty around the point estimates was taken into account, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for PoCT was found to be unfavourable for INR, but somewhat favourable for ACR, while substantial uncertainty still surrounds PoCT for HbA1c and Lipids. Conclusions: The decision whether to fund PoCT will depend on the price society is willing to pay for achievement of the non-standard intermediate outcome indicator. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12605000272695 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While point of care testing (PoCT) for general practitioners is becoming increasingly popular, few studies have investigated whether it represents value for money. This study aims to assess the relative cost-effectiveness of PoCT in general practice (GP) compared to usual testing practice through a pathology laboratory.Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis based on a randomized controlled trial with 4,968 patients followed up for 18 months and fifty-three general practices in urban, rural and remote locations across three states in Australia.The incremental costs and health outcomes associated with a clinical strategy of PoCT for INR, HbA1c, lipids, and ACR were compared to those from pathology laboratory testing. Costs were expressed in year 2006 Australian dollars. Non-parametric bootstrapping was used to generate 95% confidence intervals.Results: The point estimate of the total direct costs per patient to the health care sector for PoCT was less for ACR than for pathology laboratory testing, but greater for INR, HbA1c and Lipids, although none of these differences was statistically significant. PoCT led to significant cost savings to patients and their families. When uncertainty around the point estimates was taken into account, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for PoCT was found to be unfavourable for INR, but somewhat favourable for ACR, while substantial uncertainty still surrounds PoCT for HbA1c and Lipids.Conclusions: The decision whether to fund PoCT will depend on the price society is willing to pay for achievement of the non-standard intermediate outcome indicator.Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12605000272695. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: General practitioners (GPs) are uniquely positioned to support frailty identification and management. However, awareness of frailty and its treatment remains an emergent concept for many. Consequently, our aim was to explore GPs' perceptions, attitudes and experiences of frailty and frailty screening., Method: A qualitative focus group study was conducted with 22 South Australian GPs. GPs were recruited through a combination of purposive, convenience and snowball sampling. Data were analysed using a thematic analysis approach., Results: GPs saw frailty as a cycle of worsening decline punctuated by experience of negative outcomes. Participants largely felt that they already knew who their frail patients were without the need for formal screening. Consequently, there was varied support for formal screening, largely dependent on its intended purpose. Few GPs had actively intervened to prevent the onset or progression of frailty, with most strategies aimed at stabilisation and management., Discussion: This study suggests that Australian GPs may be open to a proactive approach to frailty assessment and treatment, given appropriate training and resources.

Background: Health literacy is the ability to understand and interpret the meaning of health information in written, spoken or digital form and how this motivates people to embrace or disregard actions relating to health., Objective: This article aims to describe the concept of health literacy, its importance and its applications in the general practice setting., Discussion: Australia trails behind other western countries in practical applications of health literacy. Health literacy underpins the efficiency of consultations, health promotion efforts, and self management programs. Recognition of the health literacy status of individuals allows use of appropriate communication tools. This can save time and effort and improve patient satisfaction and health outcomes.

After low back pain and neck pain, shoulder pain is the third musculoskeletal reason for presentation to general practice, with a self reported prevalence of 16-26%. Approximately 1% of the adult population is expected to visit a general practitioner annually for shoulder pain. Shoulder complaints are more common in women and despite the fact that 50% of acute shoulder pain resolves in 8-10 weeks, many patients present with the anticipation of being referred for imaging.

Introduction: Talking about death and dying, either with patients terminally ill or well, presents challenges for the general practitioner. There are few Australian educational resources and little Australian research into this area., Methods: We undertook two focus groups, an interview process, and a final consultation with palliative care experts and GPs., Results: General practitioners felt they needed support and education in talking about death and dying. This is separate from discussions about 'Advanced Health Care Directives'. General practitioners were open to learning new ways to help patients and families approach dying, but require support and education around initiating discussions, asking the right questions and accessing services. Participating GPs emphasised the importance of utilising palliative care supports and resources to provide ongoing spiritual and physical care. Many were particularly concerned with access to support for dying patients for both indigenous patients and those from other cultures. Advance Health Care Directives were regarded by participating GPs to be tools to facilitate a discussion around death and dying, rather than their primary purpose., Discussion: We developed a booklet to provide practical, useful guidelines for GPs in their daily practice.

Introduction: Tiredness is a common presentation in general practice for which pathology tests are commonly ordered. Our aim was to study their utilisation for tiredness., Methods: We examined an integrated database which contains the medical records for 58,139 patients and their 696,518 associated general practitioner encounters. Three hundred and forty-two patients and their 1652 associated encounters were randomly selected out of 12,291 patients and their 26,748 associated encounters that had mentioned tiredness (or a synonym)., Results: One hundred and eighty-one patients (53%) had at least one pathology test ordered at any time in their episode of care. Patients over 60 years of age, patients who consulted their GP more than once and patients without comorbidity were more likely to have a pathology test ordered. Only 12 patients (3%) had a significant clinical diagnosis based on an abnormal pathology test., Conclusion: Pathology testing for patients presenting with tiredness is high. Most tests do not yield a significant clinical diagnosis.